>> get ovr the heads of te bloggersnd the ds and the yak yak. that covers the debate at imes.

the polls showed those that watchedthe speech and appred of the plan, 58% i the cb.s. poll tink president ama is diagnose a good job. the numbers lieding. the white house thinks wa what they did, they go a lite back in augst. and theyant to eenergize democrats who said thepresident was not forceful enough in rebutting reublicans and advocating what was important. gwen: the preident said my man, okay, what was t president's man exactly? take it apart. let's ta about cost andhow do you pay for somethinlike that. the president sayshe wants to hold te costs to $9 th over 10 years. hehas ways to do that, first by exacting savings from medicare, billions of dollars.

there are experts ho say there's a lot of waste and inefficiency. the question isan you reem that out of medicare. there's also, going to be a questi of he seemed o -- o give some endorsement, but it is not cleawhether it would happen this way it would place a fee on insurance proders. there's details to be flled in. >> the president thinksthose concessions were the olive branch he neededo get it moving again. >> yes, he ade point f mentioning republicanideas that he wted to includ in his an, as yet unwrien, cluding one proposed b senator mccain and a prop opponent from ast year and anothepilot poject for reform, which is something that threpublicans have been supportive o in the past. the tails are left to be wrked t. that what he wanted. he wted to say here are thing that are most imprtant, but i'm not gointo say that we close

off all options,ncluding the public option. he is for it, but wth other idea speaking of republicans,gwen mentioned and he mentioned, senat olimpia snowe an if she could tun out being th only republican on a ipartisan bill. >> sh's one f the most moderate repubcans. she's one of six from the finae committee that has been working on. >> only rpublican participating. >> exactly right. so she's more ingled ou. and now with ted kennedy's death, the democrats have 59of the 0 seats and you need votes to cut of a fil buste they're thinkg if they cou get all democrats tovote with t party on that question, they wld need oe more republican. snowe ses most likely, but she wold be in the spotlight e would be the 60th vote. oneof my coleagues aked her, are yowilling to do hat?

she said, i wo't commenton that th's dangerousterritory. there play have be a plan-to-that pics up at least cole of other republicans. the divi is not th only divide here the democrats espeally in the house are nd of all over te lot. there was letter at one point fr liberals sayingthey wouldn vote for a billthat didn't hava pulic option. therwere blue dog centists that said they couldt vote for it with a pulic opion. did the president resolve that? the democrats in oneplace now? >> no. in the house it i a little less of a problem, doyle, because fit the house rules are different an the senate rules, because a bar majority st al yoneed. it is coeach seveae that you have a revolt from the liberals, that they didn get the pubc opon or arevolt rom the blue dogs if the costs aren'tcut. but the thinking s at the end of the day, they'll get a ill out of the houseit'll be differt than the seate and

hat's --the rubb will meet the road then hen you resolve that. >> parof the strategy is to get bills passed. theyl figure this out in onferee. they don't nd to figure o the bottom line just g a bill past the senate. doesn't have to have a ublic option. d sit down at the table. >> wha is t timetable? gwen: what will we see next? >> the coming week is the self-imposed deadline by aucus, for a bipaisan bil. that doesn't look likely othr than what wealked aout. some point, they'reoing to have to move fast. >> the vice presint still thinks -- >> you have got a lit of hen will gfirst? the house cld move faster. they have bills ready to go t the rules and tthe floor. but the's a numbr of espially conservative democrs in the house that say, wait a minute. you are oing to mae me wak the plank or something that is

not popur in y district. i'm up for r-election, let's see what the senate dos. >> let's talk out what evybody else is talking about. all the wonerful high-mindd substance, is overshadowed by one moment on thhouse floor, two words. you lie, from je wison from noh carolina. you're from nortcarolina. i wanted to clear hat up for everybody. how much did that elp or hrt wh the president wa out to do? >> if i had power, i would joe wion's bank account to find t how much rahmemanuel paid him fothis. this couldn't ork out beter. the the white house is saying, time is -- time for bickering is over and then allf a sudden, you ar at the townhall in the augt. that's whathe white house loves. the demoats in the house today on fridadecided they're going to see if ty could mil this

for longer y officiallyep manding congressman wilson ho apologized but not the floor. gwen: not with a l of contrition. >> could you help cleaup or e issue that he was shouting out, which is -- seems to be the one that is arused b most passion on the rightis will this coverillegal imgrants r not? >> it is not a imple answer. theris language inhe various lls. there's not just one bill. saying no subsidyforillegal immigrants fine. but the republican crics, incding people likejoe wilson say there's no verification in the bill. how do we know f we don't ask for proof citizenship whether or not you get that. the answero that is if you do these tax subsidies, the irs has chanisms of course, which legal residence. gwen: the federal government won't subsidize an ilegal alien

program. >> it oes epressly ba that budoes it ave adeuate enforcement? and is there a public option? can an illegal imigrant buy this planthat the government uld offer as a competitor to private insurers. the bills dot say they can't. and congressional rsearch seice says there's nothing in the bilthat says gwen: how can you stop? the white hoe today said they won'tllow in their plan, they uld bar ilegal immigran from buying t public- >> even in the cange, whic would have private programs well, forwhich you really question where is the bsidy the. accusations that are potent. gwen: that's the bg question about the end f this week for me. how ch did the outburst an how much did the ebate that folwed the outburstand the discuson of this issue, how mu did it expose what is really the problemfor the

esident and fr congresson this iss, which is meem re so head up out it that i is almost imposble to get the details out >> they are really worked up about it. buti think from talks to -- talking to members of congress, there's a lot people ded set against . they and theirmembers of congress won't vote foit. not one epublican saidthey would te for this. okay. that's kinof into that conversation. they cld get a bill through without that wealked a mine ago about te senate. i think in a way that the notices of -- noise o august and thetown hall eetings, it told you were the dine might bewere. thatoes not mean you can't pass a bill. >> there play be morepeople gwen: the court returned early to pasa a bill at could overturn finance law nd sotomayor raised the ky

questionn the case. how far are hey willingto go in overturningexisting law. weot to listen in. >> i kn we asked or further briefi on this particular issue of oveturning this but are you giving up earl here arment that is there ae statutory indication that is would overok the question? >> no, but wat the curt addressed specifically in e washington right tolife cas is the lines bear be drawn are not line that is are amiguous and iite litigtion that old the threat of prosecuti over an individual. gwen: s justice sotmayor was trying to get to the point f the heart of this. >> howwidely is the supme court going to opethe door t coorate money and politian now? you remember when this cas first came to us i the spring, it had the nrrow question. it rose from a movie don by a nservative advocacy grop.

it was an attack movie on hillary clinton who in2008 as runningor the presidential ection. they putut a movie that is caed hillary, the movie. the case deeflewhen citizen's united wand to put iton video on demand nd the fedral electi commission said no, th conflicts with the 200 law that sas you can't right during election season have corporate money that is spt -- r or agaist the candidate ovr broadcaing. it ia portion of -- of the wide lawthat is known by ponsors and fine gld and mccain ofarizona, and russ fie gold of wiconsin. we start with is narrow question of this video n emand, did it violate the election law? preme court here, and oral arments in march. it comes back though with this wider questionthat justi so the maier wareferring to. it sayswe're in t going to decide this question it tells usn june, at it is going to decide e larger

question, of ould long 1257bding court precedent that ys, that government can actuallyrestrict coporate xpenditures and lections, ad on candidates, should thse stands r stabd ever stand? are thse violions of te rit of free spech. what she was asking. it was the first question. it di't sound like a question toe the first question. it got to the het of the thing. do we have to rule broaly here or can we as ted oson argu, rule on the statutory question dealing with the 2002 haw. >> tis was argued las sping. the normal court term would have stted in october. so what is it that they ad t do it in septemb? >> they realized they wanted o addresthe larg cotitutional queson of -- you know lawthat are on the books in the stateand laws the federal books that say, that government can restrict corpate expenditurenear an election tie.

and tha's an imortant question that frankly women afect the 2010 racs and fure races. whenhey couldn't reach that, th didn't have enugh, you know brieing on the large questi. in june th said, come back n september and comback early. the o sides will addre it. i thk the idea is they coul get a ruling out beforethe end of this calendar year. and they lready did a lt of work on the queson because the briefing had begun frnkly late in 008 and in march. >>wait aminute. i thoht courts liked to deide cas on narrow gronds, rather than we grounds and i tought the spreme court especiay and hief justice roberts --very fond op sticking with pecedent and not overturnin decisions theylready made. at happened? >> that's tht's the quetion that lotof lberals hop they will ask. they know chief justice john berts during he hearings talked about not wanting o jolt

e system. and mccain and fine golin their brf in the case,coming in inlved as a riend of the court, said a ling that is is bad will jolt the system. their point s look electio are about individuals having their say, not corporate money or labor nion money. what chief justice john roberts suggestefrom the bench, are how solid are ome precedents when gener alaina kagan in representing the govnment in defending these regulations, said, ese go backfor 100 years. for 100 years, congressas been ncerned about corporatewealth in t elections and the corruptive ffect. we haven'tanctioned those for 100 years. and thisplay not be vald. >> isjustice kennedy goi to the swing judge? >> thas a good qustion. in almost every cas, it is kennedy, the swinvote. not here, just as he has

consistentlyeen against vernment regulation in this areahe's very much in favo of broad politicalree speech rights. in fact, in a key 199 case that is probly going toe undercut if not complete overturned, he disented. the majority. arguments was at they are looking for way to roll some of it back in. >>nd youknow hat we're often surprised when wfinally get a ruling >> thats why we' there. and we're waiting it. ank you, joan. >> today iof course the eighth anniversary the 9/11 attacks. anniversy of the events tha sparked wars i afghanistannd iraq iraq. eight years of heigened secuty at home and eight year of uncertainty about ow o combat terror. except this year, we have new administration ping with that. does that make a big difference? >> i'm going to sitch for a moment into frenchnd say the

more things chan, the more they stay the same. >> you said it i english. >> my frnch is so good. >>t is, go ack to the campaign and lok -- barak obama said he would do in the war onerror, was promised at he would be just as tough or tougher than george w. bus. he would attack tagets in pakistan. statement to prove he cold be a wk that got him in hot water during t campaign from hilary and others. he also said tht e would close antanamo bay and bring he judicialarts of this war back under the contitution. more secret prisons. no more extralegal stuff. what happened? onthe foreign pasht, te war, he did bascally what he said he would do. he starteto draw down the war in iraq an shift resoues to afghanistan in fact he d get touher or the bushies wouldsay not really tougher, but the pretore strikes

in afghanistan nd iraq picked up. he went on a carm offensie to rese relatns wih the muslim world. that wiltake a long run. and on the lega side, itis a diffent picture. he annoced that guantanamo bay would be csed in a year, but it hasn happenedyet an body in the administration an promise at it will happn on -- on target. he suspended the miliary tribunals,hey're back operating ain. there wasn't a way to hanled cases they figured out. he had a review anel loo at the question of detention withoutrial. that's going o and rendition, sending suspects to other countries where they wold be -- they cam around and recommded let's keep on with rendition, but, don't worry about it, we'l have th state department do tougher monitoring of whatappens on the other en

i'm not sure a -- so -- it is ally, candidae, obama becoes esident obama and collis th the harsh reali. >> what is th harsh reality with regrd to guannamo bay. thisounded simple to clo . gave thea year to al with things that armessy, in terms ofrebate ating prioners to other countries and figuring out h to retry prisoners. it is sptember 11th d we're a new months from a ear. >> pter, youprobably have the same conversation i have ith meem if the white house. if they said there was one decision they could haveade a differenway this year, i is the way they rolled out guantanamo bay. it jt turne out to b tougher and --olks back home, the whole idea of moving some of these prisoners to aximum security facilitiesn the united states rned out to be ldly unpopular. they loked at kansas and the

kansasis didn't want it. there's a supermax in michigan where there'sunmoment, ou could mploy prisonguards. they dn't want it. turned out people in eope didn't want them. the europeans e coming alog toome extent. ere's some prgress. there's 226 prisoner 120 haven' been reiewed yet and 98 are frm yemen nd nobody can quitefigure out whe they wouldo. it is a mess. >> let me ask about the lip side, the anti-terrorside. and in tems of the potecy of al qaeda, wh do we know at this point? eight years in and eight years afte tryingto seekretribution and the ar in afghanista wherdo things stand? >> that's a good fundameal question. i ink it is helpfulif you go back and remember what iis like 9/11 and the months after. we were all hring reports tat alaeda had the capabili to do alkinds of things.

theylew up commuter trais in maid, they blew up hotels in bali, thre were to bomb embassies ieurope thatwere interrupted. as we know, they had a plan that was advanced toblow up several planes in thatlanta, using liquid in ttles. what happened as a result of the bu adinistration's l fronts war on al qaeda, wth a lot f help fromother govrnmentsis -- that tha organize has been reducein its numbers and its capabilits. there are prably still 300, 400 different estiates, real al qaa people hiding outin pakistanincluding osama bin laden but they hen't goten near pulling off anythi spetacular in quite sometime. obviously,slamic terrori and mitancy is a problem lots o plac but al qaeda itself -- >> e don't knowprecisely here they are, because ey're not

thnk you. gwen: thank you a very much for that we thankou everyone at home. 're done here, but th convertion continues online with your questions andur answers. that's the "wahington week" webcast extra. you could find it atbs .og/"washington week. we'll see yonext week on shington week." leave you tonight with another lookt today's /11 observces. good night. ♪ >> on a day when thers sought stop our confidenc letus renew r purpose. how we came togetheras one nation as one peole, s americans. united not only in our griefut in our resolve to stnd with on another stand up for the cntry we all love.

♪ >> corporate funding for "washiton week" is povided by -- >> we kow why we're here. to stand behi all who serve. >> todeliver the technology vital to freedom. to hp carry hope to those n need. arod the globe, the people of boeing re working together for what matters most. nast why we're here. >> major funding for "washingt week" is also prvided bythe annenberg foudation, the corporatiofor public broadcasting and by ontributions to your pbs station from vwers like you. thank you.